Allowed

Jitendra Rav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko .

Allahabad HC14 Mar 2023/1237/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application filed under Sections 376, 504, and 506 IPC. Relying on discrepancies in the informant's statements, the nature of the alleged relationship, and the applicant's lack of criminal history, the judge granted bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence.

Jitendra Rav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1237 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Jitendra Rav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko .

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Narayan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajeet Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri H.N. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Srivastava, learned AGA and Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 0134 of 2022, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali City, District Hardoi.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged on 14.02.2022 alleging that the applicant is related to the informant as her cousin and under a false pretext of marrying her, he kept on making physical relatioins with the informant for the past four years and at times, he involved one of his friends also in committing the aforesaid act. The FIR alleged that it was on 07.01.2022 that the applicant made physical relation with the informant for the last time and thereafter he declined to marry the informant. In her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the informant reiterated the FIR version but in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she stated that she came to know that the applicant had got engaged on 06.02.2022 but on 07.02.2022 he came to meet the informant and he stated that he has not been engaged and he again made physical relations with her and thereafter he declined to marry her.

¶9

In her additional statement also, the informant reiterated the aforesaid dates. In the medico legal examination report of the informant, it has been stated that no definite opinion can be given about sexual assault.

¶10

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the case.

¶11

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances and keeping in view the fact that even as per the allegations of the informant, the applicant and the informant were having love affair for the past four years and they made physical relations with consent on numerous occasions; that there are some discrepancy in the statement of the informant regarding the last date on which the said offence was committed and that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 07.01.2023, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for being enlarged on bail pending conclusion of the trial. The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Jitendra Rav be released on bail in Case Crime No. 0134 of 2022, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali City, District Hardoi on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶15

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application bail before this Court seeking cancellation of bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 14.3.2023 Pradeep/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jitendra Rav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko .

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Rav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko .

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajeet Maliwal Vs Surendra Kumar

Smt.Rashmi Kedia Vs Kray Vikray Sahkari Sammiti Limited

Smt. Rachna Mehrotra and 2 Others Vs Upjeet Singh and Another

Virendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Civil Lko.

Ajay Singh Bhadauriya @ Lala Vs State of U.P. Thru Home Deptt. Lucknow and Ors.

Pratyush Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.